Comments on: Apple vs Blogger Settle Lawsuit – Site Closed Down http://www.lockergnome.com/blade/2007/12/20/apple-vs-blogger-settle-lawsuit-site-cloased-down/ Technology News, Reviews & How-To Sat, 18 Feb 2012 05:52:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Ron Schenone http://www.lockergnome.com/blade/2007/12/20/apple-vs-blogger-settle-lawsuit-site-cloased-down/#comment-51072 Ron Schenone Thu, 20 Dec 2007 22:42:44 +0000 http://wp3.lockergnome.com/blade/2007/12/20/apple-vs-blogger-settle-lawsuit-site-cloased-down/#comment-51072 Hi Kevin, Good points. Thanks for the comments. Hi Kevin,
Good points. Thanks for the comments.

]]> By: Kevin Bailey http://www.lockergnome.com/blade/2007/12/20/apple-vs-blogger-settle-lawsuit-site-cloased-down/#comment-51071 Kevin Bailey Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:55:17 +0000 http://wp3.lockergnome.com/blade/2007/12/20/apple-vs-blogger-settle-lawsuit-site-cloased-down/#comment-51071 The first amendment applies only to government restricting free speech or freedom of the press. Therefore it does not apply in this example as this is a dispute between to entities, Apple and Think Secret. I speak from a bit of ignorance going forward from here as I am unaware of the original article content about Apple that Think Secret revealed. Individuals and other entities have rights which can and should be protected. If someone is slandering you or revealing trade secrets in their blog or paper you have the right to protect yourself through many avenues. People or organizations developing new things often make agreements with others to assist in this development. Part of the agreement is to protect the secret with penalties attached if one should fail to do so. The people that shared the information should have been aware of that agreement and the consequences if they shared secrets with Think Secret. The consequences of that agreement should be enforced. Unless the activities put the public at risk these secrets should be protected. I think a major publication like the WSJ would have taken this into consideration prior to going to press. They would have reviewed the respect of Apples secrets against the public safety and made a decision. The first amendment applies only to government restricting free speech or freedom of the press. Therefore it does not apply in this example as this is a dispute between to entities, Apple and Think Secret.

I speak from a bit of ignorance going forward from here as I am unaware of the original article content about Apple that Think Secret revealed.

Individuals and other entities have rights which can and should be protected. If someone is slandering you or revealing trade secrets in their blog or paper you have the right to protect yourself through many avenues.

People or organizations developing new things often make agreements with others to assist in this development. Part of the agreement is to protect the secret with penalties attached if one should fail to do so. The people that shared the information should have been aware of that agreement and the consequences if they shared secrets with Think Secret. The consequences of that agreement should be enforced. Unless the activities put the public at risk these secrets should be protected.

I think a major publication like the WSJ would have taken this into consideration prior to going to press. They would have reviewed the respect of Apples secrets against the public safety and made a decision.

]]>